Scientific literacy questions - Essay Example

General Scientific Literacy It is difficult to estimate the impact general science has had on humanity as a whole. It is not, however, so difficult to see how human tendencies have hampered the growth of understanding through the scientific enterprise. A brief history of some major developments in physics illustrates the point, and one man’s theory demonstrates logical err in our egocentrism. People used to think they were the center of the universe. Copernicus postulated the heliocentric universe in 1543 CE, a theory that challenged the notion of a static earth at the center of the Universe (Popper).

Kepler developed the laws of planetary motion in 1605 CE. The laws state that the orbit of every planet is an ellipse around the Sun. In 1610 CE, Galileo published the first scientific treatise based on observations made through a telescope. When he publicly supported heliocentrism, he met with clerical opposition from the Roman Catholic Church. Galileo was warned to abandon his support for a Sun-centered cosmology, but. he later defended his views, he was tried by the Inquisition, forced to recant and spend the rest of his life under house arrest.

Today, we accept that neither the sun nor the earth is the center of the Universe. The motivations of empiricists vary with the gestalt of their time. The earliest astronomers were in fact astrologers. People believed divination of the future was possible from the study of the motions of heavenly bodies. Philosophers have often viewed astrophysics as a corporeal method of simply understanding physical reality and our place in the cosmos. Physical scientists sought answers to pressing questions based interpretations of observable data.

This path from subjective to objective knowledge raises an interesting question for our egos. In 1961, Frank Drake formulated a method of estimating the likelihood of extraterrestrial life (PBS). The Drake equation states N = R* fp ne fℓ fi fc L; where, N is the number of civilizations in our galaxy, with which communication might be possible, and:R* = the average rate of star formation per year in our galaxyfp = the fraction of those stars that have planetsne = the average number of planets that can potentially support life per star that has planetsfℓ = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop life at some pointfi = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop intelligent lifefc = the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into spaceL = the length of time such civilizations release detectable signals into space.

Current estimates of the values of the variables follow. Where, R* = 7/year, fp = 0.5, ne = 2, fl = 0.33, fi = 0.01, fc = 0.01, and L = 10,000 years; N = 7 × 0.5 × 2 × 0.33 × 0.01 × 0.01 × 10,000 = 2.1. Thus, two communicative civilizations probably exist in our galaxy at any given time, on average. Furthermore, there may be up to two hundred more that are not trying to communicate, and there are billions of galaxies like ours. Based on this reasoning, it seems fallacious to believe we are perfectly unique in the cosmos.

Based on this logic, it is difficult to argue for the impossibility of life outside our planet. It is not, however, so difficult to see how human notions of self-importance has hindered the increase of general public knowledge through the scientific endeavor. Recounting the victories and trials of one area of physics illustrates the point as much as one theory demonstrates the probability of our own facileness. It is impossible to estimate the impact general science has had on humanity as a whole, but then science is still reaching.

Works Cited"PBS NOVA: Origins - The Drake Equation". http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/origins/drake.html. Retrieved 2010-04-27.Popper, Karl R. “The logic of scientific discovery”. Routledge classics. London: Routledge, 2002.